Cargando…

Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity

INTRODUCTION: General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for incapacitated adult patients under the Mental Capac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ogden, Simon Jack, Huxtable, Richard, Ives, Jonathan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7577062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33082190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038032
_version_ 1783598135899062272
author Ogden, Simon Jack
Huxtable, Richard
Ives, Jonathan
author_facet Ogden, Simon Jack
Huxtable, Richard
Ives, Jonathan
author_sort Ogden, Simon Jack
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for incapacitated adult patients under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which primarily requires that decisions are made in the patient’s ‘best interests’. Regarding children, decisions are also made in their best interests but are done so under the Children Act 1989, which places paramount importance on the welfare of the child. Decisions for children are usually made by parents, but a GP may become involved if he or she feels a parent is not acting in the best interests of the child. Internationally, including elsewhere in the UK, different approaches are taken. We hypothesise that, despite the legislation and professional guidelines, there are many different approaches taken by GPs and allied healthcare professionals in England and Wales when making these complex decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. To better understand what is known about how these decisions are made, we plan to undertake a scoping review and directed content analysis of the literature. While the majority of decisions made in primary care are made by GPs, for completeness, this review will include all allied healthcare professionals working in primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To ensure a wide breadth of literature is captured, a scoping review will be undertaken as described by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). A five-stage approach will be taken when conducting this review: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant papers; (3) study selection; (4) data extraction and (5) summarising and synthesis. The final stage will include a directed content analysis of the data to help establish the cross-cutting themes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The scoping review will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed publications. This scoping review is the first (mapping) phase in a proposed larger study to explore how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of those who lack capacity. Qualitative research with GPs, patients and their families will follow, before all the results are synthesised using an ‘empirical bioethics’ methodology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7577062
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75770622020-10-21 Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity Ogden, Simon Jack Huxtable, Richard Ives, Jonathan BMJ Open General practice / Family practice INTRODUCTION: General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for incapacitated adult patients under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which primarily requires that decisions are made in the patient’s ‘best interests’. Regarding children, decisions are also made in their best interests but are done so under the Children Act 1989, which places paramount importance on the welfare of the child. Decisions for children are usually made by parents, but a GP may become involved if he or she feels a parent is not acting in the best interests of the child. Internationally, including elsewhere in the UK, different approaches are taken. We hypothesise that, despite the legislation and professional guidelines, there are many different approaches taken by GPs and allied healthcare professionals in England and Wales when making these complex decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. To better understand what is known about how these decisions are made, we plan to undertake a scoping review and directed content analysis of the literature. While the majority of decisions made in primary care are made by GPs, for completeness, this review will include all allied healthcare professionals working in primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To ensure a wide breadth of literature is captured, a scoping review will be undertaken as described by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). A five-stage approach will be taken when conducting this review: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant papers; (3) study selection; (4) data extraction and (5) summarising and synthesis. The final stage will include a directed content analysis of the data to help establish the cross-cutting themes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The scoping review will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed publications. This scoping review is the first (mapping) phase in a proposed larger study to explore how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of those who lack capacity. Qualitative research with GPs, patients and their families will follow, before all the results are synthesised using an ‘empirical bioethics’ methodology. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7577062/ /pubmed/33082190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038032 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Ogden, Simon Jack
Huxtable, Richard
Ives, Jonathan
Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title_full Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title_fullStr Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title_full_unstemmed Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title_short Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
title_sort protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how gps make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7577062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33082190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038032
work_keys_str_mv AT ogdensimonjack protocolforascopingreviewtounderstandwhatisknownabouthowgpsmakedecisionswithforandonbehalfofpatientswholackcapacity
AT huxtablerichard protocolforascopingreviewtounderstandwhatisknownabouthowgpsmakedecisionswithforandonbehalfofpatientswholackcapacity
AT ivesjonathan protocolforascopingreviewtounderstandwhatisknownabouthowgpsmakedecisionswithforandonbehalfofpatientswholackcapacity